There Just Is NOT Enough Time on Mondays!

Here are my notes from Monday's class related to the formation of the canon. Although there was no Bible (as we think of it today) until later in the 4th century, there is strong evidence for a an accepted codex of scriptures authenticated by the early church. I regret that we did not have more time to go over the subtleties of canonical development in class but I welcome any questions or concerns.

Here are my notes, I hope they prove helpful:

IV. The Canon

1. Old Testament
1. About the time that the OT books were becoming a standard form the writers of the NT were hard at work writing books that would come to be the NT.
2. It is important to note that, at this time in particular, it was the verbal reading of the works of faith that were more important than individual reading. Guttenberg’s press has changed the way we view this and has opened up the early church’s scriptural tradition to what I think is somewhat anachronistic criticisms. Jack & Jill analogy
3. Paul mentions in perhaps his earliest letter 1 Thess. 5:27 to have his letter read to all the brothers and sisters.
4. The OT books were read and interpreted in the light of Christ’s life, death and resurrection. Since the early church would not have any kind of written account of Jesus’ life (that we know of) until Mark (most likely) but even that was not until 30 years after Jesus’ ministry. But we do have evidence that Jesus’ teachings were valued as highly as the OT. In 1 Timothy 5:18 we have a teaching of Jesus quoted along with Deut 25:4.
5. For an entire generation after Christ’s death the teachings of Jesus were transmitted orally

2. So, what do we with that?? Why the delay
1. First: the apostles were living books. As long as they were alive and present in the church there was not the need as they were a record of the life and teachings of Jesus. 1 Cor. 15:6 (eyewitnesses to the resurrection) Papias (2^nd cent. Bishop) writes: “ I do not think that I derived so much benefit from books as from the living voice of those that are still surviving.” Eus. iii. 39.3
2. Second: They had the OT, they did have a Bible, just not the same Bible we have today.
3. Third: the tradition of the day was to pass on info orally. It was a highly illiterate culture, people frequently were taught in the synagogue and there was very little private reading. Remember that Jesus even said “You have heard it said…” (Matt 5:27). Jewish tradition had been handed down orally for centuries as some rabbis did not like the written word. 

3. The need for written works
1. Do not think that the oral tradition=confused/wrong/influenced ideas about Christ.
2. Paul exhorts the Thessalonians to hold to their traditions which they were taught either by word or epistle (2 Thess 2:15).
3. However, as Christianity grew and apostles were traveling all over the empire the need to write letters of correction, instruction grew. Plus young converts needed to be admonished, corrected and encouraged. There were a few other reasons that written accounts were needed:

                                              i.     New converts needed written records of the sayings and deeds of Jesus. The Gentiles often had no access to eyewitness accounts

                                            ii.     As the gospel spread into the Greco-Roman regions they were going into increasingly literate cultures

                                          iii.     Heretical teachings forced the church to figure out what made a doctrine apostolic.

                                            iv.     Pastoral reasons to have written documents: what did Jesus say about divorce? Sex? The Sabbath? Food laws? Circumcision? This is one of the ones that argues for the authenticity of the early writers. Circumcision was one of the major issues in the early church yet Jesus said nothing about it. It would have been easy to make something up and end the debate but the early church did not because there was nothing to report even though the point was so contentious…that is a good lesson for us still today: Do Not Put Words in Jesus’ Mouth.

d.    Once the NT books were written they were collected and eventually these 27 books comprised the NT. However, a great many other books were also being written as well as the oral teachings of Jesus were still making the rounds so a distinction between canonical and non-canonical needed to be made.

4. Agrapha (not written)
1. Luke 1:1-14 other people had also written accounts of Jesus
2. There were sayings of Jesus that were not written (agrapha) in the canonical gospels. Not uncommon in the early church 
3. Jesus, in Acts, is recorded as saying "It is better to give than to receive." However, that saying does not appear anywhere in any of the Gospel accounts. Also, the end of John's Gospel notes that his account did not include everything said and done by Jesus and if someone were to attempt to do such a thing the entire world would not be able to contain all the stories that could be told. This should remind us that we do not know everything there is to know about Jesus and fill us with humility. The Gospel writers were not being paid by the word but had limited space to record what each thought to be central to their understanding of the Jesus event. Therefore, many things were left out due to spatial constraints.
4. Just remember that this is just one more example of the oral tradition of our faith preceding the written

5. Parallel Literature
1. The vibrant/creative faith of the early church inspired many other writings. Some of which were so popular that they made it into some NT collections (listed on hand out)
2. Clement of Rome’s letter is found in Codex Alexandrinus 
3. Various genres were imitated (Gospels, letters, apologies [anon. Letter to Diognetus] and books that imitated the Letter of Revelation [even popular back then!] Shepherd of Hermas is one of those and it, along with Epistle of Barnabas are included in Codex Sinaiticus)
4. The Gospel mimics have gained a lot of popularity lately in our culture. They tend to be fantastical in nature, strong Gnostic tones and written later than the apostolic writings.

6. Other Writings
1. See hand out for info

II. The Process of Canonization

1.     collecting the canonical books

a.     Paul’s writings: remember that these letters are earlier than our Gospels, they are among the earliest of all the books of the NT that we possess. 

b.     Within the NT Paul’s letters are shown to have high standing 2 Peter 3:16. paraphrase: people are twisting Paul’s complicated ideas to suit their own theologies, just like they do with the other scriptures Paul’s teachings are put on par with the OT

c.     Clement (A.D. 95), Polycarp, Ignatius all reference Paul. It appears that by 100 A.D. his works are well known and well circulated.

d.     It is odd though because Paul’s letters were casual in tone (some of them) and he was even aware that some were not read to the churches (he tells the Thessalonians to read his letter to everyone 1 Thess 5:27). The first letter to the Corinthians, the one that was apparently badly misunderstood, is lost to us (1 Cor 5:9)  and we do not have his letter to the Laodicians (Col 4:16). 

e.     Two theories how the letters were collected: 1) a process that went on over time 2) an historical event led to the collection of Paul’s letters.

f.      The fact that the order of the letters is different in different eras of the early church seem to show that the letters were collected at different Christian centers. E.g. the Corinthian church holds on to their letters but also was able to procure letters to other churches…but the letters to them will be first since they bear the most relevance to their church. Paul even recommended that churches do this when he encouraged the Colossians to share letters with the Laodiceans (Col 4:16)

g.     Those who think it happened at once cannot provide the event that would have occasioned the collecting of the works.

h.     We have to be satisfied with theories since we do not know either way. But it does appear that the collection of the 4-fold gospels as we now have them happened around the same time as the collection of Paul’s letters.

i.      The Gospels: We have no idea how many gospels originally existed as Luke mentions that others had done the work of reporting about Jesus (Lk. 1:1)

j.      Since the earliest one is approx. 60 A.D. there are about 30 years of oral transmission.

k.     The first reference to a canonical gospel is in the Didache 

l.      The Didache warns against hypocrisy but to pray “as the Lord commanded in his Gospel” a reference to the Lord’s Prayer.

m.   Works that talk about the Gospels: Papias mentions gospels by name (Eus. iii 39.16), Justin’s Apology (A.D. 150) talks about the “memoirs of the apostles” as “gospels” Irenaeus defends the 4 fold gospel in A.D. 180 saying 4 points on the compass, 4 elements…Marcion whittled down the 4 fold to one in his canon (A.D. 140) and Tatian’s harmony of the Gospels (A.D. 160) called the Diatessaron

n.     Debate does exist within the early church as to why a 4 fold gospel. While that may seem scary to us remember that it does show that the 4 fold gospel was in existence by the start of the 2^nd century.

o.     Acts does double duty: it continues the story of the gospels and also provides the setting for the epistles. Acts is the center that holds the other two “wings” of the NT together. In this book we see that Paul was not the only one spreading the XN church. It also, some believe, allowed the other letters to be secured in the NT canon.

3.     Need for Canon:

a.     See hand out

4.     Criteria for Canonization

a.     Apostolicity: eye witnesses. They taught the early church so their work was seen as authoritative. They were in Jesus’ confidence and, as such, were seen to be in possession of the closest source of Jesus’ teachings. In fact, the popularity of some of the apocryphal writings was due in large part to the fact that an apostle’s name was attached to it.

b.     However, it is not enough to think of apostolicity was simply a matter of being written by an apostle but being apostolic in content. This was sometimes referred to as the “canon of truth”

c.     Orthodoxy or Canon of Truth: in Latin known as the Regula Fidei or Veritatis  this “rule of faith” was more or less the same in the various geographical areas of the empire, and was regarded as a key to the interpretation

d.     Not a book per se…more like the content of the Christian faith where the books of the Bible were the authoritative source but the “rule of faith” was the substance.

e.      Spirit attestation: there was something about these books that just have God in them. That may make us uneasy to say but there is a large collection of 1^st cent Christians that can attest that these books “felt alive” when they first heard them with an open heart.

f.     While this is an important principle it must be seen as operating in conjunction with the other principles. The Bible did not come together based on feelings necessarily but on quantifiable ideas that we can research, critique and review.

h.     Catholicity: a book’s universal acceptance. A document acknowledged in only a small part of the world was not likely to gain acceptance into the Canon.

i.      Some came into play in different parts at different times (e.g. Revelation and Hebrews).

j.     Chronology of Composition: only books written during what has come to be known as the “period of the incarnation” (Oscar Cullman). This is the period from the birth of Christ to the death of the last apostle.

k.      Once the apostles pass away so does the only source of direct revelation. They can appoint bishops but not other apostles.

l.     It is not a question of which book is better or more interesting but, rather, whether or not the book is apostolic.

m.     All books that come from the postapostolic period must be judged in light of the ones that came from the ‘period of the incarnation’

n.    Used in public worship: few early Christians would have owned copies of a complete collection of NT books. Because a) they did not exist yet in their full form b) attaining manuscripts was costly and c) most of them were illiterate.

o.     But the writings of the apostles were read in the churches and the believers heard them.

p.      There were some non-canonical books that were also read but that was before the time of the closing off of the canon. Examples of this can be found in the Muratorian canon of the Revelation of Peter: “some will not read it in church” and the Shepherd of Hermas should be read in private but not in public.

q.     Other works might be good and even inspirational but they cannot claim to be authoritative

5.     NO council ever made a book of the Bible canonical, they simply affirmed those books that through long usage had found to speak with the voice of the living God. (Ewert, 129)

6.     Heretics as Motivation to Compile the New Testament

a.     Marcion: had the gospel of Luke (with Jewish references cut out) and the writings of Paul. As far as we know the first person to attempt to create a canon of scripture. Thought Christianity had been Judaized and set himself to the task of bringing the church back to “true” Pauline Christianity.

b.     Marcion of Sinope came to Rome from Pontus in approx 140.

c.     He could not make the churches give up the OT or the other gospels but they did begin to set limits to the canon in light of his actions

d.     Open canon of Montanism: Montanus believed he was the coming paraclete mentioned in the gospel of John and that he was the mouthpiece of the Holy Spirit. Along with Prisca and Maximilla  he went about prophesying in the name of the Spirit and predicting Christ’s imminent return.

e.     This raised the question of whether or not the final revelation of God was to be found in Christ.

f.      Approximately A.D. 180 the church realized that such an openness could bring a lot of mischief and forced them to take a clearer position on the limit of the canon.

g.     While new insights happened all the time the final word of revelation was located in the time of the apostolic writings.

For an excellent book on this topic and how the English Bible came into existence see David Ewert. From Ancient Tablets to Modern Translation: A General Introduction to the Bible

  © James Robertson 2010